Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
Post Reply
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1488
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by CDavis7M »

TLDR; Does the CRF on Praise to Elbereth "Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play" supersede the normal last-in-first-out timing rules to cancel/prevent an untapped Nazgul Permanent Event from being tapped in response to Praise to Elbereth?

Or does the CRF mean that a Nazgul canceled by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped because Praise to Elbereth can target a declared Nazgul event that is not yet in play and a declared Nazgul may not be tapped? (Compared to Nazgul events canceled by Marvels Told and Wizard's River-horses that would necessarily already be in play, not just declared, as discarding actions can only target events in play)

-------------------------------------------------
Praise to Elbereth wrote:For each of your characters in play that you choose to tap, cancel one Nazgûl event or one Nazgûl attack. Additionally, if Doors of Night is in play, characters gain +1 prowess until the end of turn.
Wizard's River-Horses, The Cock Crows, Marvels Told, Palantir of Osgiliath are some of the other resource cards that can stop Nazgul Events. However, these cards all say "discard" (i.e., move a card from play to the discard pile) instead of "cancel". Due to the last-in-first-out timing rules these cards cannot prevent a Nazgul event played during the movement/hazard phase. This is because the Nazgul Permanent Event would need to be resolved and in play in order to be targeted by the discarding effect (per Annotation 1) and once the Nazgul is in play, it can be tapped in response to the declaration of a discarding effect such that the tapped Nazgul event resolves before the discarding effect (although Witch King which becomes a Long Event not a Short Event like the others).

The superior Nazgul stopper is Praise to Elbereth. Unlike the other cards listed above, it says "cancel one Nagul event" for each tapped character. The METW cancellation effects can prevent declared effects (not yet in play) from resolving (see Rulings on Leaflock, Goldberry, Tom Bombadil, and Twilight in the METW Companion). Meaning that Praise to Elbereth can be played in response to cancel a declared Nazgul Permanent Event that has not resolved and it can be played in response to cancel a Nazgul that was tapped, becoming a short or long event. Great!

Question: Can Praise to Elbereth cancel Nazgul events from being tapped in response to Praise to Elbereth (the tapped Nazgul event declared after Praise). Meaning that mere declaration of Praise to Elbereth (without resolving) supersedes the timing rules to prevent a later tapped Nazgul from having effect even though Praise has not yet resolved? (This is not my position, but others have argued it).

Example Situation and questions: The 8 other Nazgul are in play as Permanent Events when Khamul is played (declared). (A) Can Praise to Elbereth cancel Khamul before it resolves? (B) Can Praise to Elbereth cancel Khamul after Khamul is tapped (becoming a short event)? (C) Can Praise to Elbereth prevent Khamul from Tapping at all (or having an effect from being tapped)? If Khamul is tapped and 2 characters are tapped using Praise to Elbereth to cancel the tapped Khamul and the untapped Ren, can Ren be tapped in response for effect?

I think that the timing rules would still apply: a Nazgul tapped in response to Praise to Elbereth would resolve before Praise resolves. Meaning that Praise would not cancel the Nazgul event. So the tapped Khamul could be canceled by Ren tapped in response would not be cancelled by Praise to Elbereth.

However, I have heard the argument that Praise will actually prevent tapping of Nazgul or the effects of a tapped Nazgul as if by Divine Intervention. This position on Praise derives from the CRF:
CRF by Card - Praise to Elbereth
  • Nazgûl events discarded by Praise to Elbereth have no effect.
  • Which characters are tapping to discard which events must be declared when Praise to Elbereth is declared.
  • Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play.
I wonder what the question and context was.

Was the question: If I play a Nazgul, I can tap it to prevent Marvels Told from cancelling it, so can I tap a Nazgul to prevent Praise to Elbereth from cancelling it?
Answer: No. "Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play" because the Nazgul targeted by Praise to Elbereth is not in play yet (whereas Marvels can only discard Nazgul Events already in play) and you cannot tap a declared Nazgul Permanent event.

Or was the question: If I tap Khamul and my opponent plays Praise to Elbereth to cancel Khamul and Ren (which is also in play), can I tap Ren in response to Praise to Elbereth to force corruptions before Praise cancels Ren?
Answer: No. "Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play" because (A) Praise supersedes the timing rules somehow or (B) A new rule to the game where Thou Shalt Not Tappeth of Thy Ringwraith in response to Praise.

It seems that this CRF ruling is based on the original Clarification of Praise in the METW Companion:
METW Companion wrote:Praise to Elbereth (clarification)--When this card is played, you must declare which characters are targetting which Nazgul events. A cancelled Nazgul event--as a permanent-event or activated--is discarded and has no effect.
Right, a cancelled event is discarded and has no effect. But is this just cancellation of declared Permanent Events and events declared by tapping/activating Nazgul? Or can Praise cancel a later declared Nazgul?

There are other rulings on Praise:
ICE FAQ #3-7, all from 1996 wrote:Q: What happens to Nazgul events cancelled using Praise to Elbereth?
A: They are discarded and have no effect. Also note that when Praise to Elbereth is played, you must declare which characters are tapping to cancel which Nazgul events.
ICE Netrep - 2/19/1996 wrote:Question: What cards are considered "Nazgul events" for the purposes of Praise to Elbereth. The cards don't specifically say Nazgul event on most, so who's to say if it can cancel a Pale Sword, Nazgul are abroad, etc. And can Praise to Elbereth be used to counter/null Khamul's discard ability?
Answer: Nazgul played as permanent events, and nazgul tapped to be played as short (or long) events.

Praise can be used to cancel Khamul's ability after Khamul is tapped, and at the same time be used to try and pop a bunch of other Nazgul Perm. events. Those Perm. events can still be tapped and turned into short events, however (which would not be canceled without another praise.)
This ruling was from Scott Frazer, whereas the rest were from Ichabod.
ICE Digest 38 wrote:Question: Anyway, I have a basic question regarding Praise to Elbereth. If you tap a character with this card to cancel a Nazgul event, does it get discarded? Can opponent play Morgul Horse to take Nazgul back to his hand before it gets discarded by Praise...?

Answer: No. Morgul-horse can only retrieve Nazgul events that were tapped. You may not tap a Nazgul event in response to Praise to Elbereth.
ICE Digest 61 wrote:Question: Praise to Elbereth: Suppose my opponent has all 9 Nazgul in play. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Question: a. If he taps Khamul, I can play Praise to Elbereth, declare tapping characters, and cancel Khamul's Short-Event.
Answer: Yes.

Question b. Before he taps any Nazgul, I can play Praise to Elbereth, declare tapping characters, and cancel Khamul the Permanent-Event before he can use it.
Answer: Yes.
Oh really? Praise to Elbereth supersedes the timing rules? Was this ruling a mistake? Or is this what it really does?
ICE Digest 86 wrote: Question: Can i use "Praise to Elbereth" to get rid of a Nazgul Perm-event in play ?

Answer: Yes. And note that a Nazgul permanent-event targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped. (CRF, Card Rulings, Praise to Elbereth)
This is the same ruling as the previous one.


I think this all goes back to the interpretation of "cancel":
ICE Netrep - 3/10/1997 wrote:>The thread involving Marvels Told and Nazgul (specifically Adunaphel) is
>raging, so I thought I'd expand the scope a bit:
>
>If Marvels Told, Wizards's River Horses, and Praise to Elbereth are played
>*outside* the m/h phase, the player of the Nazgul perm events does not
>have the opportunity to respond. That much we all agree on, methinks.
I should hope so, seeing as it is correct.

>It is when these cards are played inside the m/h phase that things get
>sticky. The CRF says in regards to Praise to Elbereth (quote): "Nazgul
>events discarded by PtE have no effect." This seems a rather heavyhanded
>way of dealing with the problem, for it doesn't deal with Annotations 5
>and 6, or any other relevant subtleties.
It is more a clarification of "cancel," at least for PtE. Cancel
means discard without effect, so you couldn't really tap in response.
Cancelling something before it happens isn't really in the scope of
Annotation 5 or 6, and there are no relevant subtleties I can think
of.

>Ichabod, is there a consistent ruling that will cover *all* of these
>cards? This subject was really bugging me a few months back, and I
>thought I had it covered, but evidently not.
There is no consistent ruling because they all do different things.

>Reference has been made as well to the "Daelomin at Home debate". If I
>understand correctly, although Marvels Told can force the discard of DaH,
>inside the m/h phase this still allows the normal effect of increasing
>hazard limit. Is this right? (DaH seems a simpler case than the Nazgul
>perm events, since there isn't the ambiguity of a permanent event becoming
>a short event).
DaH is different because it is discarded and not tapped, and this happens
at declaration so it isn't around to be Marvels Tolded (double past tense
anyone?:)
ICE Netrep - 9/7/1997 wrote:I've been keeping quiet so far because I wanted to check with Mike Reynolds
to make sure I was right about all this. I will try to respond to all
the many questions in the thread so far.
1. The Marvels Told thing: You cannot Marvels Told a card played from
someone's hand until it resolves. It is not in play until then, and not a
valid target because it is not in play [Annotation 1].

2. The Nazgul Thing: A Nazgul becoming a short event happen simultaneously
with tapping the card, and therefore simultaneously with declaring the
tapping for effect. So you cannot respond to a Nazgul tapping with Marvels
Told, since it is no longer a permanent-event. The quick among you have
noticed the exception: The Witch-king becomes a long-event, and so is
still a valid target for Marvels Told.

3. The Daelomin Thing: You cannot respond to the discarding of Daelomin
At Home from play (to increase the hazard limit) with Marvels Told. This
is because any discard that is an active condition happens at declaration
[Annotation 6]. Since it is not in play it cannot be a target anymore.
This is implied but not explicitly stated by Annotation 1.

4. The Praise to Elbereth Thing: The reason the CRF says the Nazgul
are discarded with no effect is to allow you to discard Nazgul in
play without them responding to you. This allows it to be used
effectively in the movement/hazard phase, and is mainly a clarification
of cancelling the event.

I hope I got everything, but I left something out I'm sure y'all'll
let me know.
Conclusion: From these last 2 quotes I believe that the Netrep (A) ruled that Praise to Elbereth supersedes the timing rules and (B) was mistaken on cancellation because a cancellation effect can only negate another effect if the cancellation effect is actually resolved beforehand.
CoE 67 wrote: Hm, this is a bit confusing, esp. when comparing the river-horses to "Praise to Elbereth" (CRF: "Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted
by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play.") I've never quite unterstood this ruling (as it seems to contradict the
whole "chain of effects"-thing), but I can't see why Wizard's River-horses should be any different from Praise to Elbereth.
According to this reasoning, you should not be able to tap a Nazgul in response to Wizard's River-horses.

*** The ruling for Praise to Elbereth is specific to that card, and an exception to the normal timing rules.
The CoE NetRep accepted Praise to Elbereth as an exception to the timing rules.
CoE 110 wrote:PtE: According to the CRF ruling by card title on Praise to Elbereth, Nazgul events may not be tapped in response to the play of PtE. Therefore, there is only one chain possible for this card (PtE in response to the tapping of the nazgul), and so this card is 100% effective.
So, is this how you guys play Praise to Elbereth?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

1.
"Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play"
obviously supersedes the normal timing rules.
BTW. existence of the phrase may explain why using a Nazgûl permanent-event to bring cards from sideboard requires tapping and discarding the Nazgûl permanent-event, not only discarding.

2.
I understand a canceling as interrupting permanently some process or ongoing effect.
Canceling a card looks odd at first glance. But an event in play may be perceived as a case of ongoing effect.
I think that thanks to a "canceling" (instead of "discarding") of Nazgûl event, Praise to Elbereth is able to cancel Witch-king of Angmar long-event, that is not represented by a card and as such is immune to discarding.

This is the example (forgive me necessary dramatic tension) of dualism in the game.
Other example is the term "attack" that may mean an attack as a process (faced attack) or as an object (automatic-attack that may exist even if not faced).
Thanks to dual nature of the term some cards/effects may be used both against faced attacks and automatic-attacks.

3.
I do not think that Praise to Elbereth can target declared Nazgûl events.
An ability of superseding some rule does not imply an ability of superseding other rule.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

Tip:
"In response to Praise to Elbereth" is good moment to play Helms of Iron/Scimitars of Steel.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1488
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by CDavis7M »

Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:16 am
1.
"Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play"
obviously supersedes the normal timing rules.
It's not obvious if the question is "can I play Ren and tap before before Ren is canceled by Praise to Elbereth". Because in this case, Ren as permanent event is targeted by Praise to Elbereth and it may not be tapped in response to its play because (A) Ren is not in play, it is just declared, not because (B) Praise to Elbereth supersedes the timing rules. Which is the point of my post above.
Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:16 am
2.
I understand a canceling as interrupting permanently some process or ongoing effect.
From the rules, I understand cancelling as preventing an action from resolving by "negating" the conditions required to perform that action." E.g., Tookish Blood cancels/negates Call of Home (METW, p. 63). "An action in a chain of effects is negated if the conditions required to perform it are negated by another action that is resolved before it in the chain of effects."
Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:16 am
Other example is the term "attack" that may mean an attack as a process (faced attack) or as an object (automatic-attack that may exist even if not faced).
Thanks to dual nature of the term some cards/effects may be used both against faced attacks and automatic-attacks.
While an automatic-attack being faced is an "attack," an automatic-attack not being faced is not an "attack." "Attack" alone never refers to an automatic attack that is not being faced. Cards playable on an attack may not be played on an "automatic-attack" during the Movement/Hazard phase. E.g., Hoarmurath cannot give +1 strike to an automatic-attack not being faced.
Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:16 am
3.
I do not think that Praise to Elbereth can target declared Nazgûl events.
An ability of superseding some rule does not imply an ability of superseding other rule.
"Cancellation" does allow for targeting declared effects. This is the only way that "cancellation" could work. A previously-resolved non-on-going effects cannot be canceled. The METW "cancel" cards were all ruled to be able to target declared cards. Most later cards would specifically mention "declared" or "not resolved" in their cancellation effects (except Govern the Storms). The cancellation effects of METW Twilight, Leaflock, Great Ship, Goldberry, Tom Bombadil, were all ruled to target declared cards (METW Companion, p. 47 and 48). Praise to Elbereth was ruled to be able to target activated (tapped) Nazgul, which are declared but not in play.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:05 pm
It's not obvious if the question is "can I play Ren and tap before before Ren is canceled by Praise to Elbereth". Because in this case, Ren as permanent event is targeted by Praise to Elbereth and it may not be tapped in response to its play because (A) Ren is not in play, it is just declared, not because (B) Praise to Elbereth supersedes the timing rules. Which is the point of my post above.
I have tried to answer the following.
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 7:30 am
TLDR; Does the CRF on Praise to Elbereth "Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play" supersede the normal last-in-first-out timing rules to cancel/prevent an untapped Nazgul Permanent Event from being tapped in response to Praise to Elbereth?
And if someone would ask for alternative use of Many Sorrows Befall, whether does it supersede normal timing rules, then answer would be "obviously".

For "can I play Ren and tap before Ren is canceled by Praise to Elbereth" answer is: no. You cannot tap Ren before it resolve, whether it is played in response to Praise to Elbereth, other action, or not in response.
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:05 pm
While an automatic-attack being faced is an "attack," an automatic-attack not being faced is not an "attack." "Attack" alone never refers to an automatic attack that is not being faced. Cards playable on an attack may not be played on an "automatic-attack" during the Movement/Hazard phase. E.g., Hoarmurath cannot give +1 strike to an automatic-attack not being faced.
From CoE weekly Rulings/Clarifications
--------
Can you discard Hoarmurath to add a strike to the auto-attack of the
site the company's headed to?
*** Yes.
--------
(I would say: no, I can tap Hoarmurath to add a strike to the auto-attack of the
site the company's headed to.)
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:05 pm
"Cancellation" does allow for targeting declared effects. This is the only way that "cancellation" could work. A previously-resolved non-on-going effects cannot be canceled.
I think that resolved ongoing effect of Stealth may be canceled by Searching Eye, or by Noose of the Sea.
Read the texts of Searching Eye and Noose of the Sea.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1488
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by CDavis7M »

... "non-on-going"

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:08 pm
... "non-on-going"
But stil enigmatic.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:08 pm
... "non-on-going"
:oops:
CDavis7M wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:05 pm
A previously-resolved non-on-going effects cannot be canceled.
I think that both effect of Drughu and effect of Clear Skies are ongoing effects.
One is not represented by a card in play, other is represented by a card in play.
Both may be permanently interrupted. Each by other means.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

After all, what Tom Bombadil does to the "effects of one hazard that targets a company, or an entity associated with a company"?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3263
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Stopping Nazgul Events / Praise to Elbereth - Supersedes the Timing Rules?

Post by Konrad Klar »

My previous last post is now "lost post".
No big problem.
Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:16 am
Canceling a card looks odd at first glance. But an event in play may be perceived as a case of ongoing effect.
But the perception cannot be translated on rules of the game. I must admit.
Otherwise Searching Eye could be able to cancel Tower Raided or Spies Feared (played on [-me_sh-]) in play.

I see the following options:

- accepting the possibility that an event in play may be canceled. And that such canceling involves discarding the event card.
This option would give Praise to Elbereth ability to cancel Witch-king of Angmar long-event in addition to ability of canceling&discarding Nazgûl permanent-events. And there would not be a need of revisiting of Tom Bombadil.

- not accepting the possibility that an event in play may be canceled.
This involves either:
a. acceptance for double standards, where some cards/effects are able to cancel a card before the card will resolve if the cards/effects have appropriate ability in their texts, and where some other cards/effects are able of doing the same without such text.
b. assuming that all cards/effects that can cancel event have appropriate ability in their texts.

In both cases (a and b) "Nazgûl permanent-events that are targeted by Praise to Elbereth may not be tapped in response to its play" will remain a mystery. (Declared Nazgûl permanent-events may not be tapped anyway).

Independently from above choices text of Praise to Elbereth may be changed to say "discard" instead "cancel".
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”